EVEREST to OPERA

Friday, April 30, 2010

Everest 'death zone' to be cleaned up

The clean-up on the world's tallest peak is the first of its kind at such an altitude

By Joanna Jolly
BBC News, Kathmandu

A team of 20 Nepalese Sherpas is planning to clean up rubbish and bring the bodies of dead climbers down from the top of Mount Everest.

The Sherpas will work above 8,000m (26,240ft) - in what's known as the "Death Zone" because of the thin air and treacherous conditions.

They expect to bring back the bodies of at least two climbers, including American Scott Fischer, who died in 1996, and Swiss mountaineer Gianni Goltz, who died in 2008.

The expedition will set off from the Nepalese capital, Kathmandu, this weekend and reach the Everest's South Col, just below 8,000m, by 1 May.

After setting up camp on the South Col, the team will climb to the summit of Everest and start working their way down, picking up rubbish as they go.

Seven-times Everest climber Namgyal Sherpa is running the expedition.

He says this is the first time anyone has cleaned up rubbish at this altitude, but that it is important to do so to preserve the environment and make the mountain safe.

"I'm a climber and I can say frankly that I'm a little bit angry when I climb Mount Everest because of the rubbish," he says.

Avalanches

Because of the lack of oxygen, freezing temperatures and punishing conditions, the Sherpas say they will not be able to carry more than 20kg per person and that they will spend no longer than 12 hours above 8,000m in one go.

They will stay on the South Col for a week, making several trips into the death zone, before returning to base camp, resting, and then repeating the operation twice more.

Namgyal Sherpa says the task will be dangerous, but that his team is experienced enough to cope.

Expedition leader Namgyal Sherpa says Everest should not be polluted

"We need to focus on avalanches and the different crevices. If you have the technique and if you have proper experience, it's not so dangerous," he says.

The team expects to remove 3,000kg of old tents, ropes, oxygen cylinders, food packaging and camping stoves from the mountain.

They will also bring back the bodies of climbers who have perished while attempting to climb Everest.

"I have seen three dead bodies laying on the trail. But we know that there is another dead body also which we heard about a long time ago," says Namgyal.

The team plans to bring down the body of Swiss climber Gianni Goltz to base camp, where they have been given permission by Goltz's family to cremate it.

"We have a special stretcher to bring the bodies down. We can put the dead body on a stretcher and then drag it slowly to base camp," says Namgyal.

'Holy mountain'

They expect to bring down the body of American mountain guide and climber Scott Fischer.

Fischer died on Everest in 1996 - the mountain's worst-ever climbing season.

Fifteen climbers died that year, eight of them in one day.

Journalist Jon Krakauer later published the story of the tragedy in the book Into Thin Air.

The team says they may find the body of well-known climber Rob Hall

The team also suspect they will find the body of New Zealand climber Rob Hall, who also died in 1996.

Namgyal says some families have expressed the desire to leave the bodies on Mount Everest, as they feel this is what the climbers would have wanted.

However, the expedition project co-ordinator, Chakra Karki, says that Nepalese people do not want the mountain to become a graveyard.

"We respect the sentiments of the family of anyone who has died on Everest," he said.

"But it is a holy mountain and our government policy is clear - there should be no dead bodies on the mountain.

"All dead bodies should be brought below base camp and either buried or cremated. They shouldn't pollute the mountain glaciers."

New standard

As well as bringing down bodies, the team will concentrate on removing old ropes from expeditions as long ago as 1953.

These are still attached to the mountain and cause confusion for climbers who do not know whether they are secure or not.

"Those ropes are all the same and look brand new, but people misunderstand which ropes are new and which are the old ropes," says Namgyal.

"If they attached themselves to an old rope, they'll have an accident."

Namgyal says he hopes this expedition will set the standard for future clean-up operations.

"Whoever is climbing in the world, any mountain, I want to say please keep it clean," he says.

"Any mountain is a source of water. People should keep the mountains clean. And they need to support anyone who is cleaning the mountain."

The Nepalese government has now imposed strict rules on climbers, requiring them to return all their rubbish or risk losing a $4,000 (£2,600) deposit.

भारतीय प्रधानमन्त्री मनमोहन सिंह र हाम्रा प्रधानमन्त्री माधवकुमार नेपालको भुटानको राजधानी थिम्पुमा सार्क सम्मेलनको समापनपछि खिचिएको यो फोटोमा दुवैले के भनिरहेका होलान् ? संभावित संवाद (डाइलग) लेख्‍नुस्। तपाईँको काल्पनिक तर यथार्थ लाग्ने रोचक एवं घोचक डाइलगले पाठकको प्रशंसा जित्‍नेछ। सबैभन्दा बढी हरियो पाउने संवादलाई फोटोमुनि डाइलगका रुपमा राखिनेछ।

Monday, April 26, 2010

INTERVIEW WITH MANISHA KOIRALA

बिहेको टुंगो लागेकै हो, होइन ?

पिरियड थाहा छ । विक पनि थाहा छ । तर डेट फिक्स भएको छैन । असारको पहिलो हप्ताचै कन्र्फम नै हो । हामी दुवैका पापाममीले पुरोहितजीको सल्लाहमा चाँडै डेट फाइनल गर्नुहुन्छ होला ।

बिहे कस्तो हुन्छ ?

पूरै नेपाली शैलीमा, (हाँस्दै) काठमाडौंमै गर्छु । नेपाली पहिरनमा गहना पनि लगाउँछु ।

इंगेजमेन्ट भयो ?

असारमै हुन्छ ।

सम्राट्जीसँग पहिलो भेट कहिले भएको थियो ?

चार महिनाअघि । त्यसअघि अलिअलि चिनजान थियो ।

बिहे ढिलो हुँदै छ जस्तो लाग्दैन ?

म लगनमा विश्वास गर्छु । यो सबै लगनले जुराउँदो रहेछ । यो हामी दुवैका लागि सही समय हो जस्तो लाग्छ ।

सम्राट्जीको बिहे प्रस्तावलाई किन सदर गर्नुभो ?

हामी दुवै सही व्यक्तिको खोजीमा थियौं । उनले प्रस्ताव राखेपछि मैले स्विकारें । मैले खोजेकै सबै कुरा सम्राटमा पाएँ ।

के खोज्नुभएको थियो ?

सम्राट् काम गर्न मन पराउने जेन्टलम्यान हुन् । खास गरी मन मिलेपछि सौन्दर्यको मतलब हुन्न । फाइनल्ली, उनी मलाई साहै्र रामो लाग्छन् । (हाँस्दै) धेरै ह्यान्डसम पनि छन् । विदेशमा पढे पनि नेपालमै केही गरौं भन्ने उनको भावना धेरै मन पर्‍यो । मैले उनमा सोचेको कुरा पाएँ । मेरा बुवाममीलाई पनि अरूलाई माया गर्ने, आदर गर्ने उनको बानी धेरै मन पर्‍यो ।

बिहेबारेको गोप्यता मिडियामार्फत एकाएक कसरी बाहिर आयो ?

खै कसरी बाहिर आयो थाहै भएन । म धेरै साथीहरूलाई मुम्बईमा सरप्राइज दिन चाहन्थें । तर एकाएक मिडियामा खबर आएपछी मेरा हितैषीहरू रिसाएका छन् । उनीहरूले मलाई फोनमा 'तिम्रो बिहेको बारे हामीले प्रेसबाट थाहा पाउनुपर्ने ? के गर्न खोजेको ? भन्दै हप्काए ।

हिजोआज कस्तो रेसपोन्स छ ?

सही कुरा आयो, ठीकै हो । हैरानी त भैहाल्छ । तर, मेरा थुप्रै पि्रयजन, पत्रकार र साथीहरू रिसाएका छन् । यता घर (नेपाल) मा प्रेसको फोनले गार्जेनहरू हैरान भएछन् ।

बिहेपछि के गर्नुहुन्छ ?

मेरो पहिलो प्राथमिकता फिल्म, त्यसपछि परिवार । सिनेमाको काम छाड्दीन ।

हनिमुन कता मनाउने योजना छ ?

थाहा छैन । तर, हामीलाई एकपटक सिन्धुली घुम्ने रहर छ । फेरि बिहेको कुरा छिनोफानो भएपछि उनको र मेरो पुख्र्यौली सिन्धुलीको झाँगाझोली रहेको थाहा पाएँ । तर त्यो संयोग मात्रै हो ।

बच्चा पाउने की नपाउने ?

(हाँस्दै) डेफिनेट्ली । हामी दुबैले बच्चा चाहेका छौं ।

कति जना ?

(लजाउँदै अनि हाँस्दै) कति हुन्छन्, मसँग आइडिया छैन । हेरौं हामी बच्चा पाउन पनि सक्छौं अथवा अनाथ बच्चा पनि राख्न सक्छौं । वा दुबै पनि हुनसक्छ । जस्तोसुकै होस् बच्चा चाहेका छौं । आमाहरूले पनि ग्रान्ड चिल्ड्रेन खोजेका छन् ।

फिल्मी दुनियाँमा छिरेयता बिहे र प्रेम प्रस्ताव कति आए ?

थुप्रै । काउन्ट गर्न सकिँदैन । तर, सम्राट्सँग बिहेको छिनोफानोले मेरी आमाको इच्छा पूरा भएको छ । किनकि उहाँ जहिले पनि नेपाली ज्वाइँको चाहना राख्नुहुन्थ्यो । त्यो इच्छा भगवानले पूरा गरिदिएझैं लाग्यो । बुवालाई भने ज्वाइँ यस्तोउस्तो भन्ने विषयमा चासो भएन ।

बलिउड नायक नाना पाटेकर र नेपालका लागि अस्ट्रेलियन राजदूत क्रिस्पिन कोनरोयसँग तपाईंको सम्बन्धको खुब चर्चा भएको थियो । खास कुरो के हो ?

त्यस्तो केही होइन । जीवनमा धेरै मानिससँग धेरै खाले सम्वन्ध हुनु स्वाभाविक नै हो । म बफादार र खुल्ला मान्छे हुं । उनीहरूसँग मेरो गुड एन्ड रेस्पेक्टेड डिस्टयान्स छ । तर अहिले उनीहरू मेरो सम्पर्कमा नै छैनन् । उनीहरूसँग सम्मानित दूरी राख्न चाहन्छु ।

प्रेम के हो ?

दुबैले एकअर्कालाई आदर र विश्वास गर्नुपर्छ । प्रेममा यी महत्वपुर्ण हुन् । म्युचुअल रेस्पेक्ट भएन भने लभमा राम्रो हुँदैन ।

पहिलो प्रेम सम्झना छ ?

अँ, त्यतातिर नजाउँ ।

बेहुला कान्छा भए भन्दै धेरैले टिप्पणी गरेका छन् नि ?

दुनियाँमा थुप्रै खाले बिहे भएका छन् । दुई मान्छे एकअर्कामा खुसी हुन्छन् भने उमेर बाधक हुन सक्दैन । विचारधारा, प्रतिबद्धता, समझदारी मिलेपछि उमेर छेकबार हुन सक्दैन । सम्राट् र मबीच पनि यस्तै कुरा मिलेपछी बिहेको टुंगो लागेको हो । हामी दुईले एकअर्कालाई राम्ररी बुझसिक्यौं । अब सम्राट् मेरो संसार हुन् । उनीबिनाको संसार म कल्पना पनि गर्न सक्दिनँ ।

तपाईंहरूबीच कसले बढी माया गर्छ ?

यसबारे हामी दुवैबीच पनि बेलाबेला ठाकठुक पर्छ । उनी भन्छन्, 'म धेरै गर्छु ।' म भन्छु, 'म धेरै माया गर्छु ।' तर हामी दुबै बराबरी माया गर्छौं ।

झगडा हुन थालिसक्यो कि क्या हो ?

हाम्रो झगडा हुंदैन । हामीले एकअर्कालाई राम्ररी बुझेका छौं । हामीबीच आधारभूत बुझाइ भइसकेको छ । उनले मलाई चिनिसके अनि मैले उनलाई ।

भविष्यमा के गर्ने ?

म सृजनात्मक छु । सम्राटको जस्तो मलाई व्यापारमा रहर छैन । फिल्म, थिएटर र बालबालिकाको क्षेत्रमा काम गर्ने रहर छ ।

मन पर्ने नायक/नायिका कोको हुन् ?

भारतमा रानी मुखर्जी र अमिर खानलाई राम्रा कलाकारका रूपमा लिन्छु । नेपालको हकमा भने यसै सक्दिनँ । धेरै सिनेमा हेरेकी छैन । राजेश हमालजी एकेडेमिसिएन हुन् । पछिल्ला हिरोइनसँग चिनजान छैन । करिश्मा र जल शाहजी पनि राम्रै लाग्छन् ।

नेपाली फिल्मी क्षेत्रमा केही गर्ने रहर छ कि ?

नेपाली फिल्म उद्योगमा के गर्न सकिन्छ भनेर सबै कलाकारसँग अन्तरक्रिया गर्ने सोचमा छु । फिल्म खेल्नेभन्दा पनि निर्देशन गर्ने रहर छ ।

राजनीति चाहिँ ?

म राजनीतिज्ञ होइन । तर मलाई जहिले पनि राजनीतिसँग जोडिन्छ । त्यस्तै परिस्थिति आए राजनीतिमा सर्न पनि सक्छु, तर अहिले चासो छैन । व्यक्तिगत रूपमा मेरा बारे विचार गर्ने अधिकार सबैलाई छ । राजनीतिज्ञ भएर मैले विचार राखेको होइन । धेरैले मेरो स्टयान्ड थाहा पाएका छन् । म झूटो बोल्दिनँ, मेरो बुवालाई म अवश्य सहयोग गर्छु । संवैधानिक राजतन्त्रमा विश्वास गर्छु । यो पनि प्रजातन्त्र जस्तै हो ।

पूर्व राजा खलकसँग पछिल्ला दिन कस्तो सम्बन्ध छ ?

अहिले कसैसँग पनि भेट भएको छैन ।

नेपालमा तपाईंलाई सबैभन्दा मन परेका व्यक्ति को हुन् ?

राजा वीरेन्द्र, बिपी, सुशीला आमा, अनि सम्राट् (लामो हाँसो) ।

तपाईंको बिहेको खबरले थुप्रै फ्यानको दिल तोडियो होला, होइन ?

के गर्ने ? उहाँहरूलाई म मेरा लागि खुसी भैदिनुहोस् र मेरो प्रगतिका लागि कामना गरिदिनुहोस् भन्छु ।

शनिबारदेखिको आन्दोलनले जनविद्रोहको रुप लेला?

काठमाडौमा केहिको चर्चा छ भने त्यो-मे १ को मजदुर दिवसका दिनबाट शुरु हुने एकिकृत माओवादिको अनिश्चितकालिन अान्दोलनको छ । अखबारका सम्पादकहरुदेखि सडक किनारका च्या पसलहरुमा मान्छेहरु टिकाटिप्पणीमा ब्यस्त छन । सडकमा ब्यापक प्रहरि परिचालन शुरु भैसकेको छ । म सधै हिँड्ने लाजिम्पाट सडक खण्डमा आज सवारि नहुँदापनि प्रसस्त सशस्त्र र जनपद प्रहरिहरु तैनाथ देखिय । काठमाडौका सडकहरुमा महिनौँपछि यति धेरै सुरक्षाकर्मि तैनाथ देखियका हुन । आम मान्छेहरुमा त्राश छायको छ । ‘अब के होला ?’ यो प्रश्न जताततै ब्याप्त छ । उत्तर कसैसँग सायदै होला । परिणाम गर्भमा छ ।

बिगतमा जस्तै एकिकृत माओवादिले आन्दोलन घोषणा गरेर फिर्ता लियन भने अनिस्चितकालिन आन्दोलनले जनबिद्रोहको रुप लिने मेरो बिश्लेषण छ । मैले यहाँ उठाउन खोजेको बिषय, के देशले जनबिद्रोह मागेको छ त ? भन्ने हो । पानि, बत्ति, स्वच्छ हावाको समेत अभाव झेलिरहेका नेपालिहरुको जीवन बाहिरबाट हेरेजस्तो सहज छैन । निराशा हरेकतिर ब्याप्त छ । अखबारका फ्रण्ट पेजहरु राजनितिक आरोप-प्रत्यारोपले भरियका छन । भर्खरै आयका नयाँ अमेरिकि दुतले प्रचण्डलाइ भेटेर ‘प्रतिपक्ष्यसँग सर्त राख्ने सरकार त मैले देखेको थिइन’ भन्छन, माधवकुमारलाइ भेटेर माओवादिले आफनो ब्यवहार सुधार्नुपर्ने बताउँछन । माधवकुमारलाइ दोष दिनु ब्यवहारिक देखिँदैन, उदघाटन, शिलान्यास र बृक्षारोपणबाट फुर्सद पाय न उनि केहि गरुन ? सुर्यबहादुरदेखि, प्रचण्ड र गगन थापाहरु ‘सहमतिको बिकल्प छैन’ रट लगाइरहेका छन । सहमतिको परिभाषा आफनो अनुकुल बनाइन्छ यहाँ । माओवादि सहमति कुर्सि पाउनुलाइ मान्छ भने, माधवकुमार पद छाड्नेबाहेकको सहमति गर्न चाहन्छन । सडक छेउ बदाम बेचिरहेका नागरिकहरु देशको ढुकुटि सिध्याउने डाँकाहरुको सवारि हुँदा उडेको धुलोले ढाकिन्छन । बिद्यालयहरु बन्द छन । धारामा पानि आउँदैन । नेपाल टेलिकम होस या बिद्युत प्राधिकरण, सेवा नदिइ उपभोक्ताको ढाड सेकिरहेका छन । हरेक तिर ठगि छ । पहाडे र मधेसिभन्दै सदभाव खल्बल्याउने लोभि मन्त्रि तराइमा रथयात्रा गर्दैछन। परराष्ट्रमन्त्रि र उपप्रधानमन्त्रि स्वयं यो सरकार निकम्मा छ भन्दै रिपोर्टर क्लबको पुतलिसडकस्थित पसलमा कुर्लिरहेका छन । सरकार भनेको के हो ? तिनिहरु सरकार होइनन र ? सरकार निकम्मा छ भन्ने लाग्छ भने, राजिनामा दिने आँट किन देखाउँदैनन ?मन्त्रिको सङख्या यति छ कि, जनताहरु मन्त्रि चिन्दैनन । अधिकांश राज्य, सहायक मन्त्रि र सचिवहरु बिदेश सयरमा छन । नेपालमा भयकाहरु उदघाटन र पार्टि मिटिङहरुमा ब्यस्त छन । यहाँका अर्थमन्त्रि कवितासंग्रह बिमोचन कार्यक्रमको प्रमुख अतिथि हुन्छन । मानौ अर्थसम्बन्धि कामहरु देशमा बाँकि नै छैनन । प्रधानमन्त्रि कैंचि गोजिमा बोकेर हिँ्डछन ताकि सक्दो बढि उदघाटन गरेर जनतालाइ राहत दिन सकियोस ।

जुन तन्त्र आयपनि उनै अनुहारहरु हावि छन सत्तामा । जसका र जुन प्रवृत्तिका बिरुद्वमा आन्दोलन गरियो तिनैले शासन गरिरहेको स्थिति छ । आर्थिक संकटकाल घोषणा मात्र नगरियको अवश्था छ । उपभोग्य बस्तुहरुको भाउ छोइनसक्नु छ । सभामुख बैठक सारेको घोषणामै ब्यस्त छन । संविधानसभा हल अपहेलित छ । ६०१ डाँकाहरु त्यहाँ उपस्थित हुनै खोज्दैनन । कसैको घरमा चोरि गर्ने नैतिकताहिन मान्छेलाइ डाँकाको उपाधि दिइन्छ, देशको कमजोर ढुकुटिबाट संविधान बनाउँछौ भनि पारिश्रमिक र भत्ता लियर संविधानको ‘स’ उच्चारण गर्न नखोज्नेहरु डाँका होइनन त ? खोक्रा आदर्शका कुरा गरेर, लेखेर ‘इन्टेलेक्चुअल’ बर्गमा त परियला तर आममान्छेहरु खरो र ठेट बुझ्छन ।

मुल्य नतिरि पाइयको बस्तुको महत्व हुँदैन । ज्ञानेन्द्रका रुपमा नेपाली जनता एकजनाबाट शासित थिय तर उनले हात उठायपछि हामि ६०१ स्यालहरुबाट शासित हुन बाध्य छौँ । लोकतन्त्र या गणतन्त्र जे सुकै भन्नुहोस, नेपालले बास्तविक परिवर्तनका लागि मुल्य चुकाइसकेको छैन । गणतन्त्र सहजै आयको दलहरुले भन्दा ज्ञानेन्द्रले सजिलै नारायणहिटि छाडेर हो । उनले देशमा रक्तपात हुनबाट त जोगाय तर २२ थरि दलका पचासौँ दर्जन नेताले यसलाइ आ-आफनो अनुकुल अनुसार परिभाषित गरे । इतिहासले सबैको भुमिकाको मुल्याङकन गर्नेछ ।

देशले, कुनै ब्यक्ति बिशेषको अवसान या उत्थानको लागि भन्दा पनि अहिलेसम्म दोहोरिँदैआयका प्रबृत्तिका बिरुद्वमा जनबिद्रोह खोजेको छ । आमुल परिवर्तनका लागि मुल्य मागेको छ । प्रजातन्त्र या गणतन्त्र अपेक्षितरुपमा कम जनधनको क्षतिसहित आयका थिय भलै ति नाममात्रका किन नहुन तर अबको परिवर्तनले चर्को मुल्य लिनेछ । आइतबारबाट शुरु हुने आन्दोलनले जनबिद्रोहको रुप लिनसक्ने ‘ग्राउण्ड रियालिटि’ मैले देखेको छु । देशको राजनितिमा अब के होला भनेर भविष्यवाणि गर्ने राजनितिक पण्डितहरुभन्दा कहिलेकाँहि आम मान्छेको बिश्लेषण सहि हुनपनि सक्छ । संविधानसभाको निर्वाचन र परिणाममा ति प्रमाणित भैसकेका छन ।

अबका सम्भावनाहरु:

-माओवादिले आन्दोलन फिर्ता लिनेछैन ।
-शुरुमा आन्दोलन शान्तिपुर्ण हुनेछ, घुसपैठको प्रवेशसँगै भिडन्तमा परिणत हुने सम्भावना नकार्न सकिन्न । यसपालि माओवादिहरु तयारि अवस्थामा छन । भिडन्त भयमा धेरै मान्छे मर्नेछन । सरकारपनि सहमतिभन्दा बल प्रयोग गरेर तह लगाउनेतिर छ ।
-एउटा फरक के हुनसक्छ यसपालि भने, बिगतमा जस्तो जनताका छोराछोरिमात्र मर्नेछैनन, सत्तारुढ दलका केन्द्रिय स्तरका नेताहरुपनि मारिनेछन । शुरुमा माओवादि कार्यकर्तामात्र भयपनि जनतामा रहेको चरम नैराश्यता र बर्तमान सरकारप्रतिको
बितृष्णालाइ माओवादिले शक्तिमा परिणत गर्नेछन । परिणामत: जन सहभागिता नचाहेरैपनि बढनेछ । राष्ट्रिय राजनितिमा चलखेल गर्ने प्रभावशालिहरुको मृत्युसँगै आजसम्म चलिआयको राजनितिक समिकरणको अन्त्य हुनेछ । भर्खरैको किर्गिस्तान बिद्रोह
नेपालमा दोहोरिने सम्भावना छ । यस्तो भयमा केहि राजनितिक खेलाडिहरुको राजनितिक क्यारियरमात्र होइन, ति भौतिक रुपमै सकिने सम्भावना छ ।
-नेपालमा रहेको ‘एलिट’ बर्गले नचाहेरैपनि र माओवादि उत्तम बिकल्प नरहेको अवश्थामा पनि, तिब्र निराशित नेपालिहरुको ठुलो हिस्सा माओवादिको आन्दोलनको छाताभित्र आउनेछ । ‘एण्टि इण्डियानिज्म’ लाइ साँचो राष्ट्रियता ठान्ने नेपाली समाजको त्यो
बर्ग जो सामान्यत: माओवादिप्रति अनुदार मानिन्छ तर बर्तमान सरकारले कुख्याति कमायको पासपोर्ट काण्डले ति आन्दोलनको पक्षमा उभिनेछन । सम्भवत: माओवादिले बिद्रोहको सम्भावना देखेर नै पासपोर्ट काण्डमा भारतसँग जुध्ने आँट गरेको थियो ।
-सर्सर्ति हेर्दा मुठभेडको सम्भावना प्रवल देखिन्छ । नाममात्रैको सहमतिको समय गैसक्यो । परिवर्तनका निम्ति मुल्य चुकाउनै पर्ने समय आयको छ ।
-संविधान नबन्ने अवश्था र दलहरुबिच सहमतिको सम्भावना नदेखियको बर्तमान समयमा आउँदो आन्दोलन जनबिद्रोहमा परिणत हुने थुप्रै आधारहरु देखियका छन, यदि यस्तो भयमा यो जनबिद्रोह नेपालि इतिहासमा पहिलो यसप्रकारको बिद्रोह हुनेछ जहाँ
चर्को रक्तपात हुने सम्भावना छ ।
-जसका या जुन प्रबृत्तिका बिरुद्वमा आन्दोलन/बिद्रोह गरेका हुन उनैसँग बिचैमा सम्झौता भयन भने परिवर्तन निश्चित छ ।

आन्दोलनमा करोडौ नेपालिको सहभागिता हुनेछ भन्ने माओवादि र आन्दोलन त शुरु गर तिमिहरुको हैसियत देखिनेछ भन्ने दुबैखाले अति को यथार्थ हेर्न बैशाख १८ सम्म पर्खनै पर्ला तर काठमाडौको अनिश्चित मौसमले भयानक जनबिद्रोहतर्फ इंगित गरिसकेको छ ।

आन्दोलन या बिद्रोह कसैले चाहेर शुरु हुने होइनन । समयको माग रहेनछ भने ति सेलायर जानेछन । माधव नेपालको थेगो ‘बर्तमान परिपेक्ष्यमा’ सापटि लियर भन्नुपर्दा आन्दोलनको बिकल्प छैन, जुन जनबिद्रोहमा परिणत हुनसक्नेछ आमुल परिवर्तनका निम्ति ।

सबैको मंगल होस ।

Friday, April 2, 2010

Art versus anti-authoritarianism

You can imagine my delight at last week's made-for-blog news that a painting of Ned Kelly had just become Australia's most expensive work of art, reaching almost US$5m at auction.

How fitting that, in a country which prides itself on its anti-authoritarianism, art's richest price tag should be attached to a work featuring Australia's most celebrated anti-hero - a homicidal rogue who regularly defied the colonial authorities.

First Class Marksman (Menzies Art Brands)

Much is made of how Australia can boast a Ned Kelly but not an Elliot Ness or Dixon of Dock Green, a national hero who enforces the law rather than breaks it. But as regular readers will know, your blogger does not really buy into this anti-authoritarian myth-making, and continues to be surprised at the meek adherence to a bewildering array of rules and regulations (see below).

So I tend to view the acquisition of First Class Marksman - which depicts the notorious outlaw walking through the Australian bush, his rifle at the ready, wearing his trademark body armour, with its iron helmet with a narrow, oblong eye slit - rather differently. It is not so much about the sanctification of Australian folk-lore as the celebration of high-brow Australian art. It is recognising the glorious talent of Sidney Nolan rather than the inglorious notoriety of Kelly - even if, as some of you may point out, Nolan's brilliant series of Kelly paintings did much to enshrine the myth.

Admittedly, my knowledge of Australian art is sketchy at best. Following on from our last blog, any discussion surely has to start with an acknowledgement of the cultural contribution of indigenous artists, who produced an extraordinary body of work both ancient and modern. Then it moves on to the European artists who arrived here after white settlement and made the mistake of representing Australia as if they were painting Europe. The light was all wrong. The trees were too neat and tidy. Landscapes tended to look like the Scottish highlands or the French Alps.

At the end of the 19th Century, artists from what became known as the Heidelberg school changed all that by painting their homeland with a more careful eye for local detail and a distinctly nationalistic brush. Australian art began to look like Australia.

Sidney Nolan came much later and painted in a different style, but his art was perhaps the apotheosis of that trend: it was emphatically and uniquely Australian, and could not have come from any other country.

Nolan was also fixated with Australian stories and idioms. The Ned Kelly series is perhaps his most popular work - and the most visited Australian art collection at the National Gallery in Canberra. But his work also focused on the adventures of the legendary explorers Burke and Wills, along with Gallipoli, which he viewed "as the great modern Australian legend, the nearest thing to a deeply-felt common religious experience". With good reason, art experts see Nolan as "Australia's premier iconographer". So how fitting that his work should command such a high price, the modern-day currency of cultural success. The hammer went down in celebration of Australian art not Australian anti-authoritarianism.

On that front that, there's this blast from Australia's great Formula One hope, Mark Webber. Following the Australian grand prix in Melbourne, Webber said he had spent his time "dodging the ridiculous speeding and parking [rules] and all the nanny-state country that we have down here in Australia" - a reference to Lewis Hamilton's run-in with police.

"I think we've got to read an instruction book when we get out of bed - what we can do and what we can't do ... put a yellow vest on and all that sort of stuff," Webber went on. "It's certainly changed since I left here. It pisses me off coming back here, to be honest.

"It's a great country but we've got to be responsible for our actions and it's certainly a bloody nanny state when it comes to what we can do."

Bookmark with:
del.icio.us |
Digg |
Newsvine |
NowPublic |
Reddit
- What's this?

A swing and a miss

Nick Bryant | 20:56 UK time, Wednesday, 31 March 2010

Comments (24)

A fleeting overnight stay in Canberra or the chance to secure your place in history? Quite. Presidential decisions do not come much easier than the last-minute postponement of Barack Obama's visit to Australia and Indonesia earlier this month, so that he could remain in Washington to focus on minting his health care proposals into law. As the Vice-President Joe Biden rather famously put it, in language that could easily have slipped from the lips of an Australian politician, it really was a very big deal.

According to the news diary here, March was supposed to be dominated by the visit from Barack Obama, the scheduling of which had delighted the Australian government because it had come so early in a first-term presidency. With an election in the offing, Kevin Rudd could have paraded a leader with whom he has struck up a genuinely close personal relationship - a friendship which has added weight to Australia's diplomatic punch.

As it turned out, many commentators have taken the White House's decision to rearrange the trip Down Under as evidence of Canberra's diplomatic irrelevance, especially since the trip had already been downgraded to a one-night, one-city stay. Unhelpfully for the Rudd government, the change in flight plan for Air Force One came on the back of the postponement of a visit from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defence Secretary Robert Gates because of the Haiti earthquake. Again, the impression here was that Washington did not seemed overly concerned about disappointing Canberra, and the story was of how Australia had been slighted.

This was also supposed to be the month that Australia's influence also became manifest in Beijing over the Stern Hu trial. Australian diplomats started March hoping that they would have gained full, unfettered access to the entire trial, and that the court in Shanghai court would have veered on the side of leniency in its sentencing. After all, as soon as it became clear that Stern Hu would face trial, the working assumption here has been that he would be found guilty.

However, even though Kevin Rudd said that the world would be watching, China did not seem overly perturbed about obscuring the view. Then came then verdict, which the Australian government has publicly said was unnecessarily severe. Both are setbacks for Australian diplomacy, an area where the country has in recent times taken great pride in punching above its weight.

Of course, the postponement of the Obama visit sits rather unhappily with the diplomatic wrangling in the run-up to the Stern Hu trial, which the news diary had also suggested would be a big story of the month. Canberra wanted consular access to the entire trial. Beijing refused point blank. Again, the commentary has been about how easy it is to disappoint Australia, or, in this instance, to say no.

So imagine for a moment how March might have unfolded. President Obama would have come to Canberra, delivered a speech extolling the mutual benefits of the ANZUS alliance and shown, through his body language and kind words, how much he values his chummy relationship with Kevin Rudd.

Let's also imagine that Beijing had granted Australia's request for complete access to the trial of Stern Hu, and the court in Shanghai had handed down a lighter sentence.

Then we might have been talking about how Australia had entered a new era of regional influence at the beginning of the Asia-Pacific century. Of how it had new-found clout in Washington and new-found leverage in Beijing.

As March came to an end, we could have been talking about the enhanced power of Australia's diplomatic punch - a punch that was becoming commensurate with the country's growing strategic influence in this corner of the world. Instead, we saw a presidential no-show and a further souring of the relationship with Beijing - a diplomatic swing and a miss.

Bookmark with:
del.icio.us |
Digg |
Newsvine |
NowPublic |
Reddit
- What's this?

Rio Tinto response

Nick Bryant | 12:20 UK time, Monday, 29 March 2010

Comments (32)

There's been a stout-worded response from the Australian government to the 10 year sentence handed down against the former Rio Tinto mining executive, Stern Hu.

This would have been one of the most carefully-calibrated statements of foreign policy since the Rudd government took office, because it clearly wanted to register its disapproval at the severity of the punishment but not in a manner that risked a full-blown diplomatic row.

In recent months, Canberra has worked hard at mending fences with Beijing, which underscored the delicacy of the diplomacy.

Within hours of the verdict, the formulation that Foreign Affairs minister Stephen Smith delivered to reporters was that the sentence was "tough - very tough". The soft-spoken minister expressed disappointment on two counts: first, the severity of the sentence and second, the fact that the portion of the trial dealing with the alleged theft of commercial secrets was held behind closed doors with Australian diplomats kept outside.

In a stiff rebuke of the Chinese legal system, Mr Smith said that Beijing had "missed an opportunity" to show more openness and transparency. This was an "incorrect decision" that was "not in China's interests". He said that the process raised questions that the international business community would want answered - strongly implying there would be commercial fall-out from the trial.

On the allegations of accepting bribes, Mr Smith said that there was substantial evidence, aside from Stern Hu's admission of guilt on this count, of criminal wrong-doing. Still, he stressed that he thought the sentence was unduly harsh.

Senator Bob Brown, the leader of the Australian Greens, has called for Stern Hu to serve out his sentence in an Australian prison. But although Canberra and Beijing have been working on a prisoner exchange agreement, it has not yet come into effect.

It will be interesting to gauge the public reaction. Up until now, the Stern Hu case has failed arouse any great passion. Certainly, there's been none of the outrage that surrounded the case of David Hicks, an Australian convicted in a military tribunal at Guantanamo Bay of "providing material support for terrorism". Perhaps it will come, but I have yet to hear any great outcry on talk-back radio, or from the tabloids. Perhaps that has something to do with the fact that Stern Hu was born in China and did not become an Australian citizen until 1994.

For its part, Rio Tinto has put as much distance between itself and its former employees as quickly as possible. Within hours of the verdict, it sacked its former employees for what it called "deplorable behaviour". The Anglo-Australian mining giant also said that an external audit conducted after the men's arrest did not uncover any evidence of illegal activity: "Rio Tinto has concluded that the illegal activities were conducted wholly outside our systems".

Rio Tinto made no comment on the severity of the sentences, and the company's chief executive, Tom Albanese, expressed the hope that the guilty verdicts would not prevent it from continuing to build its relationship with China. Like we said last week, Rio Tinto is hoping it's business as usual.

You can get Rio Tinto's full reaction here.

UPDATE, TUESDAY 0600BST:

I just wanted to give some morning-after reaction to the Stern Hu verdict. Here's a robust piece from the business journalist, Ian Verrender, published in the Sydney Morning Herald print edition under the headline, 'Hu just roadkill on the economic superhighway".

Both echoing and amplifying one of the central criticisms of the Australian government, the paper editorialises that "what has been lost... is any previous respect for China's efforts to improve the professionalism, transparency and rationality of its judicial system". The Australian says that the verdict sends a "clear signal that China will not countenance corrupt practices from foreigners or nationals alike", and also criticises the lack of transparency.

In a short editorial, the Melbourne Herald Sun says the sentence "appears harsh", and notes that the Chinese government "missed an opportunity to demonstrate openness in its dealings with a major trading partner".

As if to demonstrate the lack of an obvious tabloid angle on this story, Sydney's Daily Telegraph does not editorialise on the sentence and relegates the story to page 5. The front page is dominated by a story about calls for stronger drink laws. At the foot of the front page is the headline: "100th Boat Arrives: PM's Refugee Crisis Deepens >>p2-3".

The tabloid television news shows, meanwhile, are still focusing on the allegations of misconduct on the set of Hey Dad!, a 1980s television sit-com.

Driving to work this morning, the most outrage to emanate from my radio was generated by the news that international Twenty20 cricket will now move from the Sydney Cricket Ground to the Olympic Stadium at Homebush (many Sydneysiders regard this as the outskirts of the city, but it has become its geographical centre because of the creep of the cul-de-sacs into the countryside). "A soulless game played at a soulless venue," in the words of one caller.

One of the most interesting strands of the Stern Hu story will be how Rio Tinto responds to the finding from the judge in Shanghai that Stern Hu passed on what the court regarded as commercial secrets to the company. By sacking the four men, Rio Tinto obviously moved quickly to distance itself from its former employees, and the charges against them - the Anglo-Australian mining giant described their behaviour as "deplorable". But the statement released in the aftermath of the verdict has not addressed the issue of the theft of commercial secrets. The statement notes: "Rio Tinto is unable to comment on the charge regarding obtaining commercial secrets as it has not had the opportunity to consider the evidence. That part of the trial was held in closed court and no details of the case were made public until the verdicts and sentences were announced today."

As I write, Rio Tinto is in the process of going through the ruling and formulating its response. I will keep you posted.